By "entrapment," do you mean "excusable rape"?

“The news that came to us from New York overnight rings like a thunderbolt. I am, like everyone, stupefied,” said French Socialist Party chief Martine Aubry. “We cannot rule out the thought of a trap,” said Henri de Raincourt, minister for overseas cooperation in President Nicolas Sarkozy’s government.

Let's be very, very, very clear about this.By a "trap", you mean putting in front of poor Mr. Strauss-Kahn ["His taste for the high life, as well as his weakness for amorous adventures, is well known"] an opportunity he could not resist attempting to take, such that the presenting of the opportunity - of that which was structurally "asking for it" - constitutes a conspiracy?

That's what you're saying, yes? That a poor African woman who has to work as a maid in the most expensive hotels is bait and that her presence in that room, with rich assholes who expect to treat her however they damn well please, is exceptional?

[I wish, in fact, you were saying the latter, as it might imply, barely, that you do not think that her work should in fact be necessary, or that it is a "good opportunity" for anyone other than the rich who wants to rape her. For if so, we could get busy turning those luxury hotels into mass housing or ex-workers clubs.]

To be slightly more generous, we can imagine that you may be saying only that the trap involves the putting into mutual orbit the two parties such that the previous, and previously ignored tendencies of one, would allow for the false claims of the latter to be taken as truth, and a smearing one at that. [Then Mr Strauss-Kahn told the journalists that he could easily imagine "a woman (who I supposedly) raped in a car park and who had been promised 500,000 or a million euros to invent such a story.]
It's evidently not bad enough that the IMF continually assaults and fucks over the poor, all the while declaring such actions as the natural, however very unfortunate and so lamentable and we wish there was another way but that's how things are, side effects of the maintenance of a global economic order. And that when things go wrong, it is, after all, "outrageous behavior or such a baffling lapse of judgment," That, evidently, is not dazzlingly clear to all.

Therefore, the point must be made, synechdochally, personally, individually, with hands and dicks and pseudo-apologies, such that it is a single operation, repeated ad infinitum. (For it does not particularly matter if it was genuinely a "conspiracy": of course such a thing is thinkable. It's not as if politics was ever a decent, just set of moves. The point is that it is exactly part and parcel of this same operation, with all its hand-wringing and braying and accusations reinforcing precisely the logic of the exceptional instance.)

Such that predation is never called by its name, resource extraction and forced access to markets is called "structural adjustment," primitive accumulation means the unwieldly but comprehensible drive of those who "know what they want," a victim means the old guy who does that wanting, and the vicious clarity of what is always the case, parceled out over the vast fields, can only mean that you have "dodged a bullet" by weeding out the bad seed who will spoil the whole plot, or, finally, that is a "a plot" of a more engineered kind, and "a damn good one," at that.